胸腔镜引导下胸腔镜下胸椎旁阻滞治疗肺癌根治性切除术后静脉注射与神经周注射地塞米松联合罗哌卡因镇痛效果的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL
Drug Design, Development and Therapy Pub Date : 2025-09-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/DDDT.S532934
Ke-Wei Wu, Shu-Yu Deng, Xu-Feng Zhang, Da-Wei Zheng, Li-Hong Hu
{"title":"胸腔镜引导下胸腔镜下胸椎旁阻滞治疗肺癌根治性切除术后静脉注射与神经周注射地塞米松联合罗哌卡因镇痛效果的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。","authors":"Ke-Wei Wu, Shu-Yu Deng, Xu-Feng Zhang, Da-Wei Zheng, Li-Hong Hu","doi":"10.2147/DDDT.S532934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As an adjuvant, dexamethasone can enhance the analgesic intensity and prolong the duration of nerve blocks. However, to date, no studies have compared the effectiveness of different administration routes of dexamethasone for thoracoscopy-guided thoracic paravertebral block (TTPB). This prospective randomized controlled study evaluated the postoperative analgesic effects of dexamethasone administered intravenously or perineurally in combination with ropivacaine for TTPB in patients undergoing radical lung cancer resection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 150 patients were randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone intravenously (Group I, n=75) or perineurally (Group D, n=75). Before wound closure, patients in Group I underwent TTPB with ropivacaine while receiving an intravenous dexamethasone injection, whereas patients in Group D received a perineural mixture of ropivacaine and dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the time to first postoperative rescue analgesia. Secondary outcomes included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, postoperative 48-hour sufentanil consumption in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), postoperative blood glucose levels, postoperative recovery parameters, and incidence of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with Group I, Group D showed a significantly longer time to first postoperative rescue analgesia, lower VAS scores at all assessed time points, and reduced postoperative 48-hour sufentanil consumption. Group D also showed a smaller increase in postoperative blood glucose levels, an earlier time to first ambulation and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (all <i>P</i> < 0.05). However, the incidence of postoperative nausea was higher in Group D than in Group I (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In TTPB, perineural dexamethasone administration with ropivacaine provided superior and longer-lasting analgesia compared with intravenous administration. Additionally, it accelerated postoperative recovery and shortened hospital stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":11290,"journal":{"name":"Drug Design, Development and Therapy","volume":"19 ","pages":"8601-8611"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12474666/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Effects of Intravenous versus Perineural Dexamethasone Injection Combined with Ropivacaine in Thoracoscopy-Guided Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Thoracoscopic Radical Lung Cancer Resection: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ke-Wei Wu, Shu-Yu Deng, Xu-Feng Zhang, Da-Wei Zheng, Li-Hong Hu\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/DDDT.S532934\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As an adjuvant, dexamethasone can enhance the analgesic intensity and prolong the duration of nerve blocks. However, to date, no studies have compared the effectiveness of different administration routes of dexamethasone for thoracoscopy-guided thoracic paravertebral block (TTPB). This prospective randomized controlled study evaluated the postoperative analgesic effects of dexamethasone administered intravenously or perineurally in combination with ropivacaine for TTPB in patients undergoing radical lung cancer resection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 150 patients were randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone intravenously (Group I, n=75) or perineurally (Group D, n=75). Before wound closure, patients in Group I underwent TTPB with ropivacaine while receiving an intravenous dexamethasone injection, whereas patients in Group D received a perineural mixture of ropivacaine and dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the time to first postoperative rescue analgesia. Secondary outcomes included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, postoperative 48-hour sufentanil consumption in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), postoperative blood glucose levels, postoperative recovery parameters, and incidence of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with Group I, Group D showed a significantly longer time to first postoperative rescue analgesia, lower VAS scores at all assessed time points, and reduced postoperative 48-hour sufentanil consumption. Group D also showed a smaller increase in postoperative blood glucose levels, an earlier time to first ambulation and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (all <i>P</i> < 0.05). However, the incidence of postoperative nausea was higher in Group D than in Group I (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In TTPB, perineural dexamethasone administration with ropivacaine provided superior and longer-lasting analgesia compared with intravenous administration. Additionally, it accelerated postoperative recovery and shortened hospital stay.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Design, Development and Therapy\",\"volume\":\"19 \",\"pages\":\"8601-8611\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12474666/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Design, Development and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S532934\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Design, Development and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S532934","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:地塞米松作为一种辅助药物,可增强镇痛强度,延长神经阻滞时间。然而,到目前为止,还没有研究比较不同给药途径地塞米松对胸腔镜引导下胸椎旁阻滞(TTPB)的有效性。这项前瞻性随机对照研究评估了地塞米松静脉或神经周联合罗哌卡因治疗肺癌根治性切除术后TTPB患者的术后镇痛效果。方法:150例患者随机分为静脉注射地塞米松组(I组,n=75)和神经周注射地塞米松组(D组,n=75)。在伤口闭合前,I组患者在接受静脉地塞米松注射的同时接受罗哌卡因TTPB,而D组患者接受罗哌卡因和地塞米松的神经周围混合注射。主要观察指标为术后首次抢救镇痛的时间。次要结局包括视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分、术后48小时舒芬太尼患者自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)用量、术后血糖水平、术后恢复参数和不良事件发生率。结果:与I组比较,D组术后首次抢救镇痛时间明显延长,各评估时间点VAS评分明显降低,术后48小时舒芬太尼用量明显减少。D组患者术后血糖升高幅度较小,首次下床时间较早,住院时间较短(P < 0.05)。D组术后恶心发生率高于I组(P < 0.05)。结论:在TTPB中,与静脉给药相比,神经周给药地塞米松联合罗哌卡因可提供更好且更持久的镇痛效果。此外,它加速了术后恢复,缩短了住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Effects of Intravenous versus Perineural Dexamethasone Injection Combined with Ropivacaine in Thoracoscopy-Guided Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Thoracoscopic Radical Lung Cancer Resection: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: As an adjuvant, dexamethasone can enhance the analgesic intensity and prolong the duration of nerve blocks. However, to date, no studies have compared the effectiveness of different administration routes of dexamethasone for thoracoscopy-guided thoracic paravertebral block (TTPB). This prospective randomized controlled study evaluated the postoperative analgesic effects of dexamethasone administered intravenously or perineurally in combination with ropivacaine for TTPB in patients undergoing radical lung cancer resection.

Methods: A total of 150 patients were randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone intravenously (Group I, n=75) or perineurally (Group D, n=75). Before wound closure, patients in Group I underwent TTPB with ropivacaine while receiving an intravenous dexamethasone injection, whereas patients in Group D received a perineural mixture of ropivacaine and dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the time to first postoperative rescue analgesia. Secondary outcomes included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, postoperative 48-hour sufentanil consumption in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), postoperative blood glucose levels, postoperative recovery parameters, and incidence of adverse events.

Results: Compared with Group I, Group D showed a significantly longer time to first postoperative rescue analgesia, lower VAS scores at all assessed time points, and reduced postoperative 48-hour sufentanil consumption. Group D also showed a smaller increase in postoperative blood glucose levels, an earlier time to first ambulation and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (all P < 0.05). However, the incidence of postoperative nausea was higher in Group D than in Group I (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: In TTPB, perineural dexamethasone administration with ropivacaine provided superior and longer-lasting analgesia compared with intravenous administration. Additionally, it accelerated postoperative recovery and shortened hospital stay.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Drug Design, Development and Therapy
Drug Design, Development and Therapy CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
382
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Drug Design, Development and Therapy is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that spans the spectrum of drug design, discovery and development through to clinical applications. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of high-quality original research, reviews, expert opinions, commentary and clinical studies in all therapeutic areas. Specific topics covered by the journal include: Drug target identification and validation Phenotypic screening and target deconvolution Biochemical analyses of drug targets and their pathways New methods or relevant applications in molecular/drug design and computer-aided drug discovery* Design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of novel biologically active compounds (including diagnostics or chemical probes) Structural or molecular biological studies elucidating molecular recognition processes Fragment-based drug discovery Pharmaceutical/red biotechnology Isolation, structural characterization, (bio)synthesis, bioengineering and pharmacological evaluation of natural products** Distribution, pharmacokinetics and metabolic transformations of drugs or biologically active compounds in drug development Drug delivery and formulation (design and characterization of dosage forms, release mechanisms and in vivo testing) Preclinical development studies Translational animal models Mechanisms of action and signalling pathways Toxicology Gene therapy, cell therapy and immunotherapy Personalized medicine and pharmacogenomics Clinical drug evaluation Patient safety and sustained use of medicines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信